HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1990/11/27 M]NtEI'F~ OF A REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Tuesday, November 27, 1990 Council Chambers
4:12 p.m. Public Services Building
CALL TO ORDER
1. ROIL CALL:
PRESENT: Councilmembers Malcolm, Moore, Nader, and Mayor Cox
ABSENT: Councilwoman McCandliss
ALSO PRESENT: 3ohn D. Goss, City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney; and Beverly
A. Authelet, City Clerk
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, SILENT PRAYER
3. APPROVAL OF M]NLrI'ES: None submitted.
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. State of the City Address - Mayor Gregory R. Cox
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items pulled: 5A and 10)
CONSENT CALENDAR OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved 4-0-
1 with Counc~woman McCandliss absent. Councilman Nader abstained from voting on Item #6.
5. WRHH'EN COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Claim against the City - Ms. Margie 3. Phares, 3465 Mandril, Benira, California. It is the opinion
of Risk Management, the City Attorney, and the City's Claims Administrators, Carl Warren & Company that
the claim be processed as follows: return as late that portion of the claim and damages accrued prior to one
year before the date of filing of the claim, i.e., 10/16/89, amounting to $50,618.72, and deny the balar~ce
of the claim, $68,429.64. Continued from 11-20-90 meeting. Pulled from Consent Calendar.
Mayor Cox announced that this item had been continued to the Council Workshop of November 29,
2990.
6. ORDINANCE 2420 APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT PkAN
AND PROJECT ~ FOR THE SOUTH1/qEST RE. DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (second readin~ and adoption) -
(Director of Community Development) /~5.~/.
Minutes
November 27, 1990
Page 2
Councilman Nader abstained from voting due to the location of his home to the Southwest redevelopment
Project.
CiD7 Attorney Boogaard informed the public that this was the subject of a previous coin toss in which
Councilman Malcolm was allowed to participate in previous Council and Redevelopment Agency hearings
on this matter and he recommended that due to previous participation, the coin toss, and the rule of legally
required participation, that Councilman Malcolm be allowed to vote on this item.
7. ORDINANCE 2423 REPF)tLING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2409 CI'O REQUIRE ANNUAL PUBLIC
HF~NGS TO SET VARIOUS UTILITY USER'S TAXES AT RATES LESS THAN THE MAXIMUM IMPOSED)
AND REPEALING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2414 (TO PROVIDE FOR COST OF LIVING INCRFJ~ES IN THE
MAXIMUM OTILITY USER'S TAXES YET SUBJECT TO ANNUAL TAX ABATEMENT HEARINGS) (second
readinS: and adoption) - Deputy City Manager Thomson Iq:5'.~ ~'
8. ORDINANCE 2424 AMENDING ORDINANCE NLrMBER 1970 RF3d~TING TO THE FINANCING
OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT V~rlTHIN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA (second reading
and adoption) - Director of Finance /q:~d 8
9. ORDINANCE 2426 AMENDING SECTIONS 2.04.090, 2.1M.120, 2.04,150 OF THE MUNICIPAL
CODE PF31MlTHNG BOARDS, COMMISSION AND COMMI'FHS. F~ TO PLACE MATTERS ON THE COUNCIL
AGENDA, AND MAKING OTHER VARIOUS CI IANGES TO AGENDA PREPARATION PROCEDURES (second
reading and adoption) - City Attorney t~,*,t ~
10. RESOLUTION 15959 APPROVINGAGRERMENTWITHCHLILAVISTAYACHTCLUBFORCHENEy
CUP - Council will consider: Option 1, Option 2, Option 3. (Mayor Cox) Pulled from Consent Calendar.
MS (Cox/Moore) to approve the agreement (option//3) which grants conditional ti~e to the Yacht Club
predicated upon certain conditions being maintained.
Councilman Malcolm did not feel the Cheney Cup or the City Medallion should be locked in a safe. He
preferred the Attorney~s option of the agreement and recommended that the Council have the right, by 4/5's
vote, to take back the Cup ff they felt there was cause.
City Attorney Boogaard stated that would be inserted as an eighth condition, at the bottom of page two of
the agreement. It should read: "The City shall have voted at a duly noticed public hearing, notice which is
givein to the Chula Vista Yacht Club, by a 4/5's vote, to reclaim title to the Cup".
AMENDMENT TO MOTION: CMalcolm/Moore) to add Condition #8 as stated by the City Attorney.
Robert Gilson, 642 Marina Parkway #20, Chula Vista, California, Commodore of the Chula Vista Yacht Club,
spoke in support of the agreement (option #3). He further stated that the Club would not be against the
additional condition as outlined by the City Attorney.
Sue Miller, Chair of the Chula Vista Library Board of Trustees, stated that they had requested in 1988 that
a display case be built but it has not been a priority item for the City. She expressed their concern over the
security of the Cup and would like to have the opportunity to return the Cup to the people of Chula Vista
once a museum is built.
Minutes
November 27, 1990
Page ]
City Attorney Boogaard stated that to give greater assurance to the Council in reclaiming the Cup, additional
verbiage could be added to Condition #8 which would state, "...reclaim the Cup without cause".
Councilman Malcolm responded that was the original intent of his amendment.
VOTE ON AMZNDg: approved 4-0-1 with Councilwoman McC. andliss absent.
Councilman Nader stated he would reluctantly vote for the motion as amended as he felt it was providing
an indefinite loan in return of public benefit subject to the condition that the agreement is revocable without
cause with a 4/5's vote by Council. The City is not giving away a valuable City asset.
VOTE ON MOTION AS AMENDED: approved 4-0-1 with Councilwoman McCandl/ss absent.
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
PUBIjC HFdkRINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
11. PUBLIC HEARING RECONSIDERATION OF GRANTING FRANCHISE FOR RECYCIdNG
SERVICES TO LAIDLAW WASTE SYSTEMS, INC. (first read/ng) - At the November 6, 1990 public hearing,
Council did nor approve granting a franchise for residential curbside recycling services to Laidlaw Waste
Systems, Inc. Instead of the negotiated agreement with Laidlaw, Council's direction to staff was to prepare
a request for proposals (RFP) for a comprehensive range of recycling services to include residential curbside
for both single-family homes and multiple units, yard waste collection, and commercial recycling.
Subsequently, during a general discussion of the relative merits of phasing recycling programs at the
November 13, 1990 regular meeting, Council approved reconsideration of the previous decision and directed
staff to docket and notice the issue again for a public hearing at this meeting. Staff recommends Council
place the ordinances on first reading. (City Manager) Continued from the November 13, 1990 meeting.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open.
Stephanie Popek, Principal Management Assistant, informed Council that a letters had been received from
Bay City Services urging the City to go out for bid, Chris Chase endorsing the program, and an unsigned
letter endorsing integrated waste management and recycling.
Mayor Cox stated he had received a petition signed by 237 people in opposition to any franchise to Laidlaw
Waste Systems.
Ms. Popek stated that the residents of Chula Vista would benefit from four different grants awarded to
Laidlaw, San Diego Urban Corp, City of Chula Vista, and EastLake Development Company. She noted that
the proposed ordinance modifies the rate to $1.10 rather than the original $1.20. The reduction is due to
the recycling grant obtained by Laidlaw.
City Attorney Boogaard stated the proposed ordinance should be amended to tighten it up. A corcected copy
of the ordinance was distributed to the Council for review.
Councilman Nader referred to the published notice of the public hearing and questioned whether the
information was sufficient notice for the Council to take action on granting the franchise tonight. He stated
the trash billings would go up if a new landfill had to be sited and was concerned that the public was not
Minutes
November 27, 1990
Page 4
being made aware of this issue. He suggested that the ordinance be modified to include: "direct the
franchisee to make estimates of the savings over a specified period of time in landfill costs as a result of
going to mandatory recycling". The other suggestion would be to require that the billing would have an
item indicating the charge for recycling service and another line item listing the credit for conservation
savings due to recycling.
Ms, Popek responded that Councilman NadeFs concerns would be a top priority of a public awareness
campaign. Logistically there is a limitation as to how much could be placed on the billing, but an additional
flyer could always be added with that type of information.
City. Attorney Boogaard responded that he had reviewed the legal notices and felt there was adequate.
Councilman Nader questioned why the grantee would have veto power over the split rate.
City Attorney Boogaard recommended that the following language be added, as part of the revision, at the
bottom of page 6: "which concurrence shall not be unreasonably be held".
Joaquin Alvarez, 991 Loma View, Chula Vista, California, registered his support of the staff
recommendations.
Kathy Sudry, 778 Baylor Avenue, Chula Vista, California, spoke in support of the staff recommendations.
She expressed concern over the setting aside of the franchise with Laidlaw after their involvement and
cooperation in the pilot program. She encouraged Council to move forward with the recycling program and
the franchise with Laidlaw.
Barbara Bechtoldt, 556 Nantucket Drive, Chula Vista, California, spoke in support of the staff
recommendations. She informed Council that she has been involved in a voluntary recycling program and
noted it had become a burden on the volunteers. They urged the Council to move forward with the
recycling program.
Marianne Gibson, 582 Nantucket Drive, Chula Vista, California, spoke in support of the staff
recommendations and urged Council to move forward with the recycling program.
Paul Brown, 149 Cenrre Street, Chula Vista, California, representing South Bay Recycling, spoke in support
of the staff recommendations. He noted the fines that would be implemented if recycling was not done as
mandated by AB 939. He felt that Laidlaw had done a good job in the pilot program and should be granted
the recycling franchise.
Byron Georgiou, 600 "B" Street, Suite 1515, San Diego, California, representing Bay Cities Services, Inc.,
spoke in opposition to the staff recommendations. He encouraged the City to move ahead with the recycling
program by going out to bid with a comprehensive program. He suggested the City establish a process of
broad based coalition of people in the community and in the business. He then reviewed current programs
in su~Tounding areas. Trash that has been separated should cost less because of the savings in landfill costs.
The recycling program for the City will only be a drop in the bucket, industrial, commercial, yard waste and
others are the significant programs for recycling. He felt the City should go out for RFQ's and questioned
Laidlaw's qualifications for recycling as they had no experience in that area and did not feel there was any
reason to lock the City in a five year contract. He felt their firm could provide better service at a lower cost
and stated they would pick up the pilot program, at no cost, while the program is out on RFP's.
Councilman Nader questioned if he understood Mr. Georgiou to say that if adopted, the citizens of Chula
Vista would not realize the costs savings from the reduced use of the landfill.
Minutes
November 27, 1990
Page 5
Mr. Georgiou responded that the landfill diversion credit, is not a negative credit as it does not go off the
charge for regular trash pick-up. The only way citizens will save more than they are paying, is only if a year
from now the recycling charge is eliminated.
Councilman Nader questioned that if in the future the savings exceed the recycling charge so that it comes
down to zero, would Council then be able to consider, when reviewing the balance of the fee, all expenses
and savings to the franchisee including unallocated landfill savings.
Assistant City Manager Asmus did not feel the under the current franchise that factor would be taken under
consideration.
City Attorney Boogaard responded that Council would have to call for a public hearing rather than an
automatic increase.
Mr. Georgiou stated that if Council granted the extension of the franchise to pick up trash to include
recyclables, they are granting credence to the legal argument they have asserted that they have an exclusive
right to participate in every other recycling service.
Councilman Nader responded that Laidlaw had specifically acknowledged that the City had not relinquished
their claim, that the franchise does not cover those items. He questioned the timeline as presented by staff
for the RFP process.
Mr. Georgiou felt that the process would not take longer than six months and did not understand why staff
had proposed seventeen months.
Ms. Popek responded that the original time estimate was based on the RFP process for only the curbside
program. Due to the comprehensive program suggested by Council, it became apparent to staff that it would
take much longer. The estimates have come from actual time frames in other cities. The cities of Poway
and Santee currently have an open recycling program and are uncertain as to how they will handle the
requirements of AB 939.
Pare Tort, 81 "F" Street, Chula Vista, California, spoke in opposition of the staff recommendations and urged
the Council to go out for open bids.
Victor A. Nolan, 12 Via Barbarini, Chula Vista, California, stated the residents of the mobile home park do
not receive individual billings. Due to this system, park residents would not be aware of credits given and
multiple units would be ripped off.
Theresa Aland, 1433 Naccion Avenue, Chula Vista, California, representing Indwellers, presented a petition
to Council in opposition to the staff recommendations. She stated she is currently recycling everything in
her waste stream and felt Laidlaw should only charge her the $1.10. She felt the action by Council on the
recycling franchise was premature and that Laidlaw should conduct the recycling program within the City
of Chula Vista at no cost.
Alan Purves, 678 Third Avenue, Chula Vista, California, representing Laidlaw, thanked those citizens
speaking on behalf of recycling and questioned the timing of the protest of Bay Cities Services. He
emphasized that the proposal for single family curbside recycling is the first phase of a city wide planned
program to meet AB 939 goals. Laidlaw and City staff have never represented this as the whole answer.
The reason for going with the single family households is because it is easy to implement and get people
involved. While this is ongoing, the necessary studies and implementation planning can be done for the rest
of the program. They cmwently operate over fifty landfills and transfer stations across the United States and
November 27, 1990
Page 6
Canada and recycle at every transfer station they operate. They provide curbside recycling pickup service
to over a million homes throughout the country and operate material recovery facilities also. If successful
with their proposal to the City, and ultimately doing more than the single family home program in the City,
they would entertain the possibility of constructing a processing facility for the City of Chula Vista.
Ms. Popek responded that a high level of public participation in the curbside recycling program would only
result in a 5-8% reduction towards the mandated 25%.
City Attorney Boogaard referred to the agreement and stated that the "Council retains the discretion to
review participation at the beginning of the second year and every year thereafter". If the Council then
determines that the public participation is inadequate, they can require Laidlaw, under this provision, to
commence or intensify it's public education program not to exceed ten cents per customeL
Councilman Moore questioned the potential of joint funding for a recycling coordinator.
Mr. Purves felt it was his understanding that the City was hiring a conservation coordinator and that due
to the duplication, there was a reduction in the cost (three cents) to the customer.
Richard Anthony, Principal Solid Waste Program Manager, County of San Diego, stated he had approximately
twenty years of experience in recycling. He then gave a brief overview of programs and facilities in the
County. In all programs he has never been abIe to show that recycling was cheap. The County went to
residential recycling for the purpose of public education. Once recycling is started at home it is often carried
over into offices and businesses.
Mayor Cox questioned whether there were any cities in the area that had a comprehensive recycling
program.
Mr. Anthony responded that he was not aware of any city with a totally comprehensive program.
Councilman Moore felt that staff should contact other cities throughout the country with comprehensive
programs to utilize their expertise.
There being no further public testimony, the public hearing was declared closed.
Mayor Cox felt the City needed to move forward with the recycling program, with the ultimate goal a
comprehensive recycling program. The proposed ordinance would allow the City to begin the first phase
of such a program. Laidlaw has received a grant from the County of San Diego which is non-transferrable
which will help to defer the cost to the customer.
Councilman Malcolm questioned whether Laidlaw would agree to the addition to the agreement "that the
City can go out ro bid with other haulers" in order to avoid any possible litigation due to their exclusive
franchise with the City of Chula Vista to haul trash.
Cit3, Attorney Boogaard responded that in order to accomplish that, at the bottom of Page 2, end of last sub
paragraph, under Sub-section A, Section 21 "each party reserves...." would have to be deleted. With that
deletion, the final paragraph will give the City the right to go out to bid without legal attack.
Mr. Purves felt this had to be looked at in perspective of the whole franchise and commitments made by
Laidlaw in the granting of the refuse franchise which he felt clearly covered the materials that are now being
defined as recyclable. The City Attorney has raised the question that Laidlaw would suffer no damages and
Minutes
November 27, 1990
Page 7
therefore would not have a basis for lawsuit which would prevent the City from going out to bid. If it can
be clearly understood that Laidlaw would not be damaged, they would agree.
Councilman Malcolm wanted assurance that the City could go out for competitive bids without Laidlaw
suing the City.
Mr. Purves stated that during the program, as incremental parts of the program are inn'oduced, the City
dea~y has the right to go out to bid on those elements. He felt the City Artomey's intent in bringing this
up was to allow Laidlaw to clarify their intent. It is not Laidlaw's intent to sue the City.
City Attorney Boogaard stated the proposed ordinance would amend their agreement. The City would obtain
written acceptance from Laidlaw regarding the terms of the proposed franchise. If the Council wants to
accomplish what has been proposed, the last paragraph in A would have to be deleted and a signature
obtained. The provisions of the last paragraph, page 9, states the only condition to go out to public bid
would be to meet and confer with Laidlaw and advise them of the intent to go out to public bid.
Councilman Malcolm felt Laidlaw had been a good corporate citizen, but that the City should negotiate the
best deal. He would like to have the term of the contract shortened.
City Attorney Boogaard responded that the amortization schedules for the trucks required were studied and
staff felt that the initial amortization period would be five years. Laidlaw had agreed to giving two years
notice of cancellation any time after the third year. The notices only apply to those recyclable materials for
single family residential, i.e. newspaper, glass, cans and plastics. If the City proposes to expand the project,
it can be expanded on separate bid with meet and confer with Laidlaw for advisement. If the City wants
to cancel the proposed agreement with Laidlaw for this scope of services, we would have to give them two
years notice before going out to bid on those four recydables.
A. ORDINANCE 2427 AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 1993 BY MODIFYING THE TERMS OF
LAIDLAW WASTE SYSTEMS, 1NG. FRANCHISE TO COLLECT RECYCIdXBLE MATERIALS WITHIN THE CITY
OF CH1JI~ VISTA AND RESELL SAID MATERIALS
MSC (Malcolrn/Nader) delete, page 2, last paragraph, tu~der Section 21A starting with the word 'each party'
and ending with the word 'franchise'. Approved 4-0-1 with Gounc/lwoman McCandliss absent.
ORDINANCE 2427 OFFERED, AS AMENDED, BY MAYOR COX, reading of the text was waived.
Councilman Nader felt that Laidlaw would be in the unique position of guaranteelug that the trash pick*up
would be on the same day as the recyclables.
AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 2427: (Nader/Cox) delete 'to extent possible' on page 2, Section B1.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION: (Cox) to amend the language on page 2, Section B1, to state 'to the maximum
extent possible'. Motion withdrawn by Mayor Cox,
VOTE ON AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 2427: approved 4-0-1 with Councilwoman McCandliss absent.
Councilman Malcolm stated he would reluctantly support the ordinance and was only doing it because he
felt that this would move the City out from under an exclusive franchise. He felt it was important that a
mandated program should go out to bid. Council had an obligation to insure the lowest price to the citizens
of the City.
Minutes
November 27, 1990
Page 8
MSC (Nader/Moore) direct staff to bring back language in the second reading that would direct, as part of
the public education effort, notices to customers regarding estimated savings in landfill costs in SB 939 as
a result of the recycling program. Approved 4-0-1 with Councilwoman McCandliss absent.
Councilman Nader stated he did not want to see the program delayed and would therefore support the
ordinance. He felt it should be clear to staff that as to future aspects of the recycling program that Council
wants to see them open to competition.
VOTE ON ORDINANCE 2427 AS AMENDED: approved 4-0-1 with Councilwoman McCandliss absent,
B. ORDINANCE 2428 ADDING SECTION 8,24.195 TO THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO REDUCED RESIDENTIAL CURBSIDE RECYCLING COLLECTION RATES (tint readinK)
ORDINANCE 2428 OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, reading of the text was waived.
Councilman Malcolm stated he would vote against the ordinance. He felt a break in fees should be given
to all low income households rather than just due to age.
VOTE ON MOTION: approved 3-1-1 with Councilman Malcolm voting no and Councilwoman McCandliss
absent.
Councilman Moore felt Councilman Malcolm's comments were valid and suggested that future reports
regarding reduction in rates include some comments and rationale about low income.
12. PUBI2C HEARING COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR DIXIElANE LLIMBER COMPANY
CO1VI~OIJ.FD FILL - Dixieline Lumber Company, owners of the property located northwest of the
intersection of Fifth Avenue and C Street, propose to grade and fill their site which is located within the
boundaries of the Chula Vista Coastal Zone. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of
Community Development) /'/~'~ '3
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open.
Jack Duncan, 2047 E1 Cajon Boulevard, San Diego, California, representing Dixieline Lumber Co., spoke in
support of the staff recommendations.
There being no further public testimony, the public hearing was declared dosed.
RESOLUTION 15960 ALrHIORIZING TrlE ISSUANCE OF COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
NUMBER 008A TO DIXIEHE LUMBER COMPANY FOR A CONTROIJ.EF~ FILL
RESOLLFFION 15960 OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, read the heading, waive the text.
Councilman Moore questioned how long the fill would be on site.
Robin Putnam, Principal Community Development Specialist, responded that the surcharge would only be
there two to three years, the fill would always be there.
Councilman Moore questioned whether there was a condition guaranteeing that it would not be there longer
tban thirty-six months.
Minutes
November 27, 1990
Page 9
Ms. Putnam responded that it was not currently included but that it could be added as a condition.
MSC (Moore/Cox) to add Condition #7 - surdaarge not to exceed thirty-six months. Approved 3-0-2 with
Councilmembers Malcolm and McCandliss absent.
VOTE ON RESOLUTION 15960 AS AMEJqDED: approved 3-0~2 with Councilmembers Malcolm and
McCandliss absent.
OTHER BUSINESS
13. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Victor A. Nolan, 12 Via Barbarini, Chula Vista, California, requested clarification of SB 2446 Legislative
Council Digest) before the next Mobilehomes Issues Committee to be held January 22, 1991.
City Attorney Boogaard stated his office would assist in the legislative review.
14. ITEMS PUIJ~D FROM THE CONSENT CAI~NDAR (Items pulled: 5A and 10) The minutes will
reflect the pubIished agenda order.
15. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTf S) - None
16. MAYOR'S REPORT(S)
a. Appoinlment to Boards and Commissions: Board of Ethics Committee - Continued from 11/20/90
meeting. 2~ 3 5/
MSC (Cox/Nader) to appoint Janet Richter and Steven Padilia to the two vacancies on the Board of Ethics.
Approved 3-0-2 with Councilmembers Malcolm and McCandliss absent.
Mayor Cox requested that staff prepare a letter for his signature to the Presiding Judge thanking him for his
time and efforts in interviewing the candidates and his recommendations.
b. Council tour will be this Saturday at 8:00 a.m. He requested that staff contact CalTrans to see if
Council could tour the freeway improvements.
c. Referred the concept of a city seal or logo to staff for review.
d. Reviewed the numerous maps of the City and stated that many of the parks were not identified.
He would like to refer this item to staff to have them identify someone within the City that would monitor
maps to insure that the City gets accurate representation.
e. Referred the de~bulators to staff for review back to Council during the budget process.
Minutes
November 27, 1990
Page 10
Sid Morris, Deputy City Manager, responded that the Fire Department is contacting members of the
community regarding the donation of a defibulator to the City. If this can not be accomplished, it will be
brought back to Council during the budget process.
Councilman Nader requested that the item come before Council before the budgeting process once it has
been ascertained whether it will be donated.
f. Requested that staff review the street signage on Beyer Way and Hermosa Avenue. Beyer Way
should be referred to as Third Avenue.
17. COUNCIL COMMENTS
a. Councilman Nader:
1. Requested a verbal report within the next several weeks as to where the efforts to acquire a mobile
home relocation facility stands.
2. Requested that staff ascertain who from the City is serving in Saudi Arabia and send them a City
Christmas card.
ADJOURNMF2fF
The City Council adjourned to a Redevelopment Agency meeting at 7:35 p.m. and reconvened at 7:37 p.m.
The City Council/Redevelopment Agency met in closed session at 4:30 p.m. to discuss and reconvened at
S:S0 p.m.:
Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section S4956.9 - Margie 2. Phares
Potential acquisition of property pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 - 798 "F" Street
(Rados Brothers, owners)
Potential acquisition of property pursuant to Government Code Section 5495.8 - 1427 4th Avenue,
(Muneo Torimaru, owner)
ADJOURNMENT AT 7:40 P.M. to an Adjourned City Council Meeting (Conference) on November 29, 1990
at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Conference Room.
Respectfully submitted,
BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk
' x ~ L
by: "--' j' '~ '- ' " ~ .
Vicki C. Soderquist, Deputy City Clerk